Treason is well defined by the constitution and SCOTUS cases. The problem here is you are using some subjective, impressionistic version of " treason" that bears no resemblance to legal reality. As much as I enjoyed Ann coulter's book, this was the fatal flaw. She got fuzzy. A shame, since her talents are considerable and her moxy is refreshing.
The fact that "Treason" sold well will only encourage her, I fear, to just throw red meat at the right wing. "Slander" made points in the national debate; "Treason" was conceptually weaker, because she broadened the word so much as to make it a weapon against anyone.
Yes....I think the difference is been being pointed and sparky ( Slander) and being paranoid and neurotic ( Treason)
I do note that her book sales have declined as she has ratcheted up the word list. I do find it odd that Coulter would use such a loose , subjective definition of the word treason in that she bills herself as a " constitutional lawyer."